Mnyb wrote: > Or what he *thought* sounded better to him , if "sounded" (soundwaves > traversing the room) should be an actual physical event apart from the > experience you have in your brain . > > There is two parts of this the actual "event" electricity travels down > some wires and make your equipment do soundwaves . > You experiencing said event . Many of the suggested things in this tread > are of the kind that does not effect the actual soundwaves , but only > happens in you subjective experience . > > This "emperors new clothes" kind of improvement vane off after a while > ,then it's time for the next upgrade :)
There are a thousand ways to affect the sound of the touch, the issue is that measuring for bit perfectness does not differentiate the audible differences which leaves the door open for people to say bits are bits and the sound quality is subjective. The issue with the Touch is all the junk it is trying to do at the same time as play music which introduces noise into the signal. Now, if the touch is the best digital player you have heard then good for you, but don't judge others just because they have heard better. In a few year time you will be able to offload the rendering to hardware, then I think we will get a near perfect signal, but as long as a cpu is having to share time slices with other processes to render a stream there will be potential for impact to the SQ. ------------------------------------------------------------------------ SBGK's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=52003 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=96419 _______________________________________________ Touch mailing list [email protected] http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/touch
